Climate Change Is Destroying The World Essay

Climate change is one of today’s most hotly debated topic. Scientists for many decades have made supposed claims that current energy creation and reliance on fossil fuels will lead to inevitable changes to the planet. Today, climate change denial is still a popular to most of the world despite the mounds of evidence to support that it exists. The climate change issue suffers from being mismanaged by various parties through focusing on the wrong issues and the lack of true commitment from the general public, according to Sandra Steingraber.

It is well known that politics and religion are two topics to never to be discussed with someone one does not know well. In today’s society, it feels as if this list of topics that are socially deemed inappropriate to discuss seems to be growing, with climate change now being a conservation to avoid. This aversion to discussing climate change appears to stem from the fact that the issue tends to polarize opinions, in which people fall into one of two groups: climate change skeptics and climate change believers. This paper seeks to address and analyze the ways in which climate skeptics speak about and understand climate change as well as how climate scientists understand climate change phenomena. More specifically, this paper focuses on how climate skeptics comprehend the relationships between grasslands, livestock, methane and nutrient cycling and how these interconnected concepts do not lead to the type of climate change that “green urbanities /green politicians/green activists/green elite” predict. The paper will conclude with an evaluation of the two differing positions between climate skeptics and climate scientists, in which I will determine which argument I find to be the most accurate.

In his essay titled “Climate of Denial”, Al Gore, a well known environmental advocate and former vice president, verifies the reality of climate change and global warming. The piece is an attack on corrupt companies and news outlets that attempt to persuade the public that global warming is not a critical issue. Gore also earnestly conveys our environment’s current state and offers possible solutions that would increase awareness about global warming and begin to revert the planet back to a healthier, more sustainable state. The overarching purpose of Gore’s work is to call attention to the widespread climate change that is occurring. However, he also focuses on the corruption and bias within the media, and their attempts to conceal the truth about global warming. Writing to those who are conflicted about who to believe, he makes a valid argument that defends the beliefs of he and his fellow activists and encourages others to become more active in the climate change issue.

Everyone talks about climate change and how the Earth is slowly deteriorating, but no one seems to have specific examples. In Linnea Saukko’s “How to Poison the Earth,” she does use specific examples of what is causing climate change. She uses satire with a hint of sarcasm in her essay. She gives the reader specific examples of how to poison the Earth, but not really wanting to poison the Earth. Gretel Ehrlich writes her essay, “Chronicles of Ice,” a little differently. She uses personal experiences of visiting a glacier and the way that it is falling apart to explain climate change. She uses detailed, sensory description to explain

As a kid who has cared about nature his entire life, and an avid modern environmentalist for four years and counting, this issue has been at the center of my psyche for quite some time. I have seen public perspective on this issue change before my eyes. From the original rejection of Al Gore’s Inconvenient Truth movie on “global warming” to personally marching alongside 300,000 people in our nation's capital to raise awareness on climate change. However, despite all of these avenues the issue is still spoken about as this distant idea that eventually will be a disaster. Many politicians and news networks speak of the need for slow implementation of policies and programs to right our environmental wrongs. The best way to paraphrase the common narrative of this issue would be to say, climate change is going to happen down the road, it will probably be bad and trying to fix it in the near future would be a good idea. That weak call to action shoves climate change onto the long to-do list of the leaders of our world. Not only does it not create the urgency needed to actually curb the effects of our environmental ignorance, but it does not accurately describe the threat of a changing climate. Treating this like a political issue will not allow for the rigorous changes needed to address such a problem in the timely manner that is required.

Climate change has been a subject of discussion in the media for many years, supported with the use of arguments against oil polluting the environment and extreme scare tactics of Polar ice caps flooding civilians backyards. The issue has been ignored by the majority of lay people as seeming too complicated, and with all the conflicting information in the media in the past, who can blame them? However, scientifically, climate change and what perpetrates it is fairly simple to understand and society as a whole is beginning to come to a clear consensus on climate change. Thanks in part to more readily available forms of media and information, people have become cognizant of the fact that climate change is a legitimate problem which requires immediate amelioration. While this may seem melodramatic, society is realizing that climate change is an issue which can no longer be denied if the human race wishes to continue.

The world has many years existing in this galaxy and every day we see that is changing more and more but not in a very good way that it can end in the extinction of the planet earth. “Earth Hasn’t Heated Up This Fast Since the Dinosaurs’ End” (Lavelle). Carbon is growing so fast in the atmosphere faster than in the past 66 million years since the dinosaurs went extinct (Lavelle). All the presidents hold a position of power that could change this big problem that the planet is having, behind this problem there is other problems that are causing a much bigger problem in all the country. “By year 2100, the average temperature will rise by 5.8 degrees as a result of global warming. The Arctic ice is melting rapidly. By 2040 the region is expected to have a completely ice-free summer, or even earlier. Since 1880, the average temperature has risen by 1.4-Fahrenheit degrees” (Rinkesh). Humans are the one in power of this planet, they are often making some decisions, but they do not know if that is going to hurt the planet. Also, is because humans are selfish. These decisions often include manipulating the system of other country, how they work, what products they can make, how to get benefit from that country, and etc. Also, taking control and/ or credit over other countries work. Some countries are taking very serious the Global Warming problem, so the other countries want a prove of how are they helping to fix this problem. Many countries have agreements with other countries that

The documentary “Climate of Doubt” presented by PBS shines a light on the ongoing public debate on climate change and particularly whether it is man-made or a natural occurrence. According to the documentary, new public studies have found that only about 50 percent of Americans today believe that climate change is caused by human activity. PBS Frontline interview John Hockenberry explores and takes the audience through various interviews with scientists, politicians, and skeptics from both sides of the political spectrum to see what is causing the public divide. One side believes climate changed is produced through human activity and that the Fed Gov. needs step in and impose federal regulations like the cap and trade system to cap the amount

These last two election cycles have demonstrated the importance of climate change in relation to politics and the american people. What is unfortunate is that what seems to be a very crucial and real problem in our human survival, according to scientists, is being debated by people who do not have the scientific credentials to even discuss the science behind the reality of climate change. Those behind the skeptics, have funded a successful campaign against the reality of the facts and have introduce doubt into the sciences.

Climate change is one of the most controversial and ongoing topics in society today. Scientist and politicians alike all have opinions, but very often they are not in line with each other. 97% of climatologists agree that climate change is happening, as well as many of the large corporations in this field such as NASA, the Geological Society of America, and the American Association for the Advancement of science. Still, these debates take place on sites such as climatedebatedaily.com or the worldwide conference that was held on June 6, 2015 that took place 79 countries. Both sides claim to have solid evidence that supports their theories, but it is evident to most scientists and corporations alike that the human race is creating our own destruction

The dichotomy of climate change can divide the world down the middle. Those who believe in climate change advocate for earth-friendly policy to better the environment and help society as a whole. Those who believe the evidence does not support a climate change theory simply ignore scientists and do not advocate for any type of change in living. However, change is necessary to preserve the planet and maintain the modern democracy- not just in the US, but in the world. Those who deny climate change also deny the chance for cleaner, eventually cheaper energy, long-term jobs, healthier lifestyles, and greater unity between nations. The best and most efficient way to control the path to sustainable, green living is through the government.

Because of the most recent election season, there has been a renewed interest in the topic of climate change. In the 2016 Presidential election, the green party received over 1.2 million popular votes nationwide, when they usually receive only 100 thousand or so. With an increased interest in the topic of climate change, I feel it is necessary to provide factual data and projections on the path climate change will take to decrease misinformation. I proclaim the correct course of action to solve the problem of climate change is to do nothing.

In the news report “Climate of Doubt”, PBS FRONTLINE investigates the reasoning behind the relationship climate change and politics has been fluctuating over the past few decades. In 2006, An Inconvenient Truth, a film that called for action against climate change, gained mass attention from the American Public. However, this rally for environmental sustainability created some undesirable consequences. There is a growing movement for anti-climate change by various CEOS, scientists, politicians, etc. that have been marketing against green movements. They claim that climate change was developed out of scientific malpractice, has no scientific backing, and the bad weather we experience is no more abnormal than it was a century ago.

The roles of science, the media, and politics greatly influence public opinion and understanding of the world around us. These three spheres of information and action are invariably linked when discussing complex global issues like climate change. However, the presentation and resolution of disagreement within the three spheres is incredibly independent. The many ways that climate change, specifically the debate on the existence of climate change, is portrayed within these spheres can greatly affect public emotion, knowledge, and policy of such an issue. This is particularly evident in the United States (US) (Boykoff & Boykoff, 2007). This paper attempts to briefly outline the portrayal and settlement of the debate on the existence of

Climate change is a rising issue of importance in our day and age, and one that is threatening our global society on many levels. In the past few decades, scientists have discovered that our planet’s climate has been changing at an alarming rate. The way in which we have changed the land to